You know, I have my own opinions on this and almost any other match, but so much at the higher levels of this stuff starts to become very subjective. I realize that many times "X is better than Y" is obvious, but tons of it is stylistic.
I don't really know my own style...close proximity probably forbids me an unbiased observation. But just scrolling up this thread, everyone has a signature that fits their particular stylistic idiom. Gannon, Lana, Alliance, Pittman, TOH, etc.
And which is better? Mine.
No, the answer is "who knows?"
...
...maybe this is an old-news kinda thing. Like, "Well dur, Digi." But I guess it never really struck me until now.
...coincidentally, this is also my excuse for every future lost duel. "Irreconcilable Stylistic Preferences".....not because I'm worse.
...
In any case, good match guys. I feel like I'd be out of place attempting to compete with such quality work, which is about as high a compliment as I can give.
Well, that's sort of what it always comes down to, to a certain extent; you can go over the technical aspects all you want, but everyone has different styles that they prefer over others. Being as judgments are opinions of the judges, then their stylistic tastes will play a part in the final decisions.
Kinda. That's about half of it. The other half is non-duel-related. And it's just that we'll make sigs (duels or otherwise) in our own personal idiom more often than not, and that stylistic continuity is just as important to the sig community as who has more "talent" (so long as there's at least some talent involved, that is...like I said the F- work can't be compared to A+ work just because it's in an "idiom")
So yeah, it applies to judges too. But I wasn't speaking so much to the duels as in general.
You can always look at technical aspects. That should usually be 80-90% imo. But there always is that extra umph a piece can get from style.
It would be wrong to say art is simply judged on tastes. But it does hold influence. When I critique work, I try to focus mostly on mechanics, but if it is composed in a style I like, then I support it.
There are two problems with sigmaking:
1. It is a undeveloped art. I don't see people coming out with artist's statements for each sig. If they did so, I'd feel more comfortable judging the sig artistically.
2. People are trend whores. This goes for art to, but you have a lot more freedom of materials and techniques than you do in digital-land. Often sigs just look like they are the same thing repackaged again and again. Thats not good art. Good art moves somewhere, evolves.
Regardless, Gannon, I like yous sig a lot. I think it could use some more darks and more readable text, but design wise I think its really strong. I feel its a bit underdeveloped, like I want to be seeing more in areas, and that probably a product of you rushing to get it in. The left half is pretty strong, the arm could use some work. The right half is much weaker, due in major part to that awkward light source. However, the layout is great and the colors are stunning. Its a lot more design based than mine, and I like that.
^^^ That is more like a real critique (that comes form an artist, and I don't know if the average sigmaker is prepared to make those kind of evaluations). Thats a downside to KMC versus a more graphic oriented site. But on those you often get judged by trendwhoring. Its all a balance.
On a last note, for those who don't speak french....my quote says "Often the fear on one evil leads us into a worse."
Yeah, I realized that a few days earlier. I don't really care if people like my style as long as I like it. And in my view, I have one of the best styles :P Thats why I switched back to using brush backgrounds after trying to do backgrounds without brushes. I just don't like Smudging, distorting, and filtering styles.
But are we making these sigs so we could become famous and make money? No, thats why personally I make sigs for my own enjoyment. For my own visual pleasure, seeing myself create something I personally like. However if your doing art for buisness, thats a whole another idea.
Style is one part of art, but the design is another.
I didn't mean to imply that it's all a stylistic thing. I tried to make a few disclaimers where I talked about the need for "talent" before style can become a factor.
So yes, mechanics = very important too, at least for our purposes in this forum.
...and no, I'm not as qualified to make a legit artistic statement as maybe Alliance or Lana (who I know is also an artist beyond sig-making). I realize my limitations, and those of the forum, but I think we operate fairly well given those limitations.
I'm honestly trying to break into non-technological artwork some, just for fun mostly. And I've even been planning to shift my PS work toward backgrounds, photo manips, lanscapes, etc. to braoden my horizons. But none of that has happened yet, so I really only know what I've learned on the forum.
I don't think thats entirely the case. You post your sigs because you want to share them and gain clout. Even if its not money.
Real art is not just a business, it is academic. For each one of my personal sigs, and for most of my duel ones, I could write an artists statement about what the sig means. "It's pretty" is not a real meaning. I'm a firm believer that putting that much thought into something makes the product better. I think people can really see that.
Its harder in duels or requests, but it should definitely be obvious in your personal work.
On a side note...there is totally an old man's face on the chest of this render. The tattoo wraps around his head.
Gender: Unspecified Location: One for the other hand
When I used to enter art contest back in school the judges used to walk around with someone watching them with a stop watch and the one that would win would be the work that the judge looked at longest. With any judging there is a degree of personal taste, that can't be avoided but for me when I judge work I quickly look at the design first and remember the feeling that it gave me and how it impacted me. From there I will look at the design and what went into it and for me theme is very important be it a simple to complex design.
Some of my designs are my style and for my personal taste and others are toward the general population, things that I like I know that the general public doesn't appreciate or understand and doesn't "sell". When I do work for others I have to keep that in mind, just because I don't like it doesn't mean that other do not.
As for the judging, we have two votes in and waiting for the other two.
Well, really, for sigs I generally don't put a large amount of work or effort into them, and rarely do they have any meaning beyond "I think it looks pretty". I like to make them but all it comes down to is for me, making signatures is a way to kill time and fiddle about with Photoshop techniques I don't use in my usual artwork.
In my usual artwork, though...well, art is my outlet, and everything I make has a deeper meaning to it, even the things that I've made on a whim because I had some random inspiration out of nowhere. It's still got a deeply personal meaning to it and I could probably write essays on what various pieces of art I've created mean to me, though largely I prefer to keep my artist statements very short because I like for people to draw their own conclusions and to find their own meanings...and as my art IS my outlet, what I intend it to mean I keep to myself. It's very personal, it's basically me baring my soul to the world, and I like to keep what it ultimately is about personal; I make my art for me, and I don't care if someone else is confused by it, they can work it out themselves. If they can come to the same conclusions, that's fine, if they come to their own, that's fine too.
Also, sorry for the sidetrack. I think some of what I was intending was taken out of context, as it was more amused observation than philosophical statement. But still, an interesting discussion I think.
....
And yes, in my personal work at least I'd like to think there's purpose behind almost everything I do....though I can understand Lana's viewpoint, since she has other artistic outlets that she takes more seriously. I don't...at least not in the visual arts (I'm a musician, but it's a decidely different medium).
I like this sidetrack. I wouldn't quite underestimate parallels between music and art. One of my best friends is a Music/comp major and we can often be on the same page about artistic method.
I was actually expecting that comment eventually (I almost edited in something saying "though they can be quite similar in many respects").
....but yeah, I could make cliched analogies, or simply talk generally about my approach to the two mediums. Either one would produce quite a few similarities, despite the differences. But I definitely take music more seriously. It's not my job, but I make money doing it (and also do it just for fun many times), and have invested way more time into it. Image editing...not nearly as much
Gender: Unspecified Location: One for the other hand
For me it is harder to judge music for the simple fact that I don't really understand all of the things that go into it, I know that there is much artistic talent but I simply go by what sounds good to me.
Well, music IS a form of art, I don't see why a musician and visual artist wouldn't have a lot of the same opinions on artistic method and such. They're just different types of art.
(I played violin most my life so I'm not unfamiliar with music, but it's not my specialty by any means)
I was a performance major for 2 years, and still play quite often. And yes, the similarities are myriad....like I said, I should have edited in that comment to begin with.
P.S. I will admit, however, that with sigs, a lot more than I'd care to admit is probably "how does it look to me"...though I try to work in technical aspects as much as possible too.
KMC Community Forums
No, the answer is "who knows?" 
Mar 8th, 2007 02:05 AM
